8F: 1935: The 8F class was introduced for the haulage of heavy long-distance
freight traffic. The design incorporated all of the G.W.R./Stanier design
concepts, such as taper-boiler and long travel valves. Until the Riddles
Austerity locomotives were introduced, it formed the standard War Department
design during the Second World War. Many were built for military or "home-front"
duties in the workshops of the other three main line companies. 849 engines
were eventually built, but not all of these ran in, or were returned to,
Britain.

7F :1929: Fowler: This design was based on the L.N.W.R.G2 class. The Belpaire boilers
were originally, designed by Hughes, for the L.N.W.R.0-8-0s. Unfortunately
the bearing surface was inadequate, as is shown by E.S. Cox, A.J. Powell
and Hawley, and the class was completely withdrawn before the earlier L.N.W.R.
G2 class disappeared.

Powell, A.J. Living with London Midland
locomotives. 1977.Chapter 10: The strong pullHawley, RA. The Fowler class "G3" 0-8-0s. Trains ill., 1952,
5, 221-3. illus., table.A history of the class.
WITHDRAWAL of a standard class. Rly Mag., 1949, 95, 343. illus.
The early withdrawal date should be noted: in part this date reflected
part of the oil burning conversion programme.

4-6-2

7P (later 8P) "Princess Royal": 1933: The Princess Royal class was Stanier's first major L.M.S. design.
In many ways the design was a direct derivative of the GWR King class.
The front-end dimensions were generally similar. The wheel size was identical,
which was non-standard on both railways. The boiler differed considerably
except for the low superheating area which was common to both designs. It
is not surprising that this similarity exists because Stanier presumably
had some part in the design of the King class whilst in the employment
of the GWR. In 1935 the boiler was radically altered and a much higher degree
of superheating was incorporated.

L.M.S.R. Pacific tenders. Rly Mag., 1983, 462.This entry from Jones is clearly incorrect. Notes on the tenders
originally and subsequently fitted to Nos. 6200 and 6201.

Performance and testing: LMS. demonstrations and testing methods tended to favour absolute
endurance techniques. This was understandable on a railway where through
locomotive workings from London to Carlisle were common place and in certain
instances runs were extended through the 401 miles to Glasgow. Moreover normal
trains were heavy and the northern part of the Anglo-Scottish route is steeply
graded. The two most notable test runs were the press trip with a 505 ton
train in 1933 and the 1936 high-speed run from London to Glasgow and
back.

1933: press demonstration: This run, which should have been from Euston to Crewe, unfortunately
ended with the failure of No. 6200 at Lichfield. This was due to an overheated
axlebox.

Allen British Pacifics observes that not a few troubles were
experienced with the 'Princesses' after they entered service. Principles
of design which had been traditional at Swindon for long past, but which
depended on the use of Welsh coal and the scientific handling methods in
which Great Western drivers and fireman had been trained, were not automatically
to achieve the same success on the L.M.S.R., whose engine-crews were to learn
that their new and imposing 4-6-2s needed a good deal of 'nursing' if they
were to give of their best.
There were mechanical difficulties also. It had been an error to position
the outside cylinders over the trailing wheels of the bogie; there was a
tendency for these cylinders to work loose, and eventually strips of metal
had to be welded to the main frames in order to secure the flanges of the
cylinder castings more firmly, though even then not with complete success.
Again, there were fractures of the rear truck frames, which were experienced
similarly with the 'Duchesses' and led to the last two of the latter being
equipped with cast steel truck frames.Another Swindon speciality, the regulator working in the superheater
header (in the absence of a steam dome) was found to be troublesome, and
not a few header fractures occurred. For the same reason the regulator proved
to be stiff in action, so that slipping by these engines, with their relatively
low ratio of adhesion, was not easy to control. In the end all the 'Princesses'
were provided with steam domes, to which the regulators were transferred.
All these points weighed heavily with Stanier when the designs for the
'Coronation' class were in preparation.

Powell (Living with London Midland locomotives) notes that
there were mechanical weaknesses which undoubtedly lowered availability and
reacted on reliability and steaming. First of all the outside cylinders,
located over the trailing bogie wheels, gave a lot of trouble with loosening.
The plain fact was that, because of the inside motion, the frames could have
very little horizontal staying in this zone  there was only the bogie
centre in front and the exhaust breeches pipe between the cylinders, the
rest being simple vertical stretchers, and so a lot of racking of the frames
could take place, destroying the tightness of the cylinder bolts. As soon
as this happened the movement transferred itself to the exhaust channels,
which loosened and often fractured  and this usually impacted on the
steaming by leaking exhaust steam into the smokebox. As so often in locomotive
design, the layout in this area was necessarily a compromise: one either
put in a massive structure which produced a robust frame but made access
to the inside motion appalling for preparation and maintenance (as on the
GWR four-cylinder locomotives) or left it reasonably open for human access
and suffered some flexing.

In the end, when normal shop repairs were ineffective, the decision
was taken to support the cylinder bolts by welding buttress strips on to
the frame plates fore and aft of the outside cylinder flanges, with fitted
packings between, and this was fairly successful. Crewe applied this arrangement
by keeping a spare front end frame section, complete with cylinders and
stretchers and extending back to the leading coupled axle horns; when a
'Princess' came in for general repair, the front of the old frames was cut
off and the replacement unit welded on.

The original regulators, in the superheater header in the smokebox,
were distinctly 'heavy' to handle, and lacked sensitivity (a serious design
weakness on an engine with a lot of power in relation to its adhesion.) In
fact, I used to watch little Laurie Earl of Camden on occasion  ; he
was about as tall as six penny-worth of coppers  when he got the rightaway'
at Rugby, run across the cab and positively launch himself at the regulator
handle. In addition, there was a fairly heavy mortality of headers themselves,
due to fractures  and that didn't do the steaming much good, either!
So all the 'Princess' boilers were converted to dome regulators in the early
1950s. To pile on the agony, there was some trouble with fracturing of the
rear bissel truck frames and loose rivet attachments to the radial arm 
an occurrence also not unknown on the 'Duchesses' with the similar arrangement.
And even the coupled wheel centres seemed to come from a poor batch of castings
 ; the Crewe Steel Foundry was notorious for the porosity and sand
inclusions in its products  and spoke fractures were not
infrequent.

Turbine locomotive ("Turbomotive") 1935:
Most experimental designs have tended to be surrounded by secrecy
(e.g. the Fowler high-pressure locomotive 6170 Fury) and test results
have not been published. Frequently little has published until long after
the locomotive has disappeared. The LMS treated their turbine locomotive
project very differently, however. Firstly, the contemporary descriptions
were detailed and secondly Bond's Paper is, using Holcroft's phrases from
the discussion, "a very full and frank account". The locomotive was based
on the Princess Royal design, but two turbines (one for forward running
and a smaller unit for reversing) replaced the reciprocating engine. Contrary
to most turbine experiments a condenser was not fitted. Bond, in his book
made it very clear that the term Turbomotive was greatly
deprecated

Retrospective and critical: With the exception of some of the footplate commentaries the entries
listed below add little to R.C. Bond's monumental account, which serves to
illustrate the gap that exists between professional and amateur
assessments.

Allen, C.J.British Pacific
locomotives.1962.The section on Stanier Pacifics is based on the same author's The
Stanier Pacifics of the L.M.S. (see below).Allen, C.J.The Stanier
Pacifics of the L.M.S.. 1950. Certain of the illustrations and diagrams contained in this work are
not repeated in the later British Pacific locomotives
(above).Allen, C.J. Lone locomotives. Trains Ann., 1956, 67-79; 82-4.
25 illus. Bond, R.C. Ten years' experience with the L.M.S. 4-6-2 non-condensing
turbine locomotive, No.6202. J. lnstn
Loco. Engrs, 1946, 36, 182-230. Disc.: 231-65 (Paper No.
458).Every facet is covered in detail from the basis of the design to test
running including some of the difficulties experienced in operating an
unconventional locomotive in service. Pp. 231-3: Sir William Stanier modestly
explained how Dr. Guy of Metropolitan Vickers had approached him indicating
the possible advantages of the Ljunstrom turbine and of how they had visited
Sweden to inspect locomotives of this type.Cook, A.F.Raising steam on
the LMS: the evolution of LMS locomotive boilers. Huntingdon: RCTS,
1999. 233pp.Understandably a considerable amount of effort was required to get
the boiler right for this unusual locomotive.Ellison, J.H. Experimental locomotives. 4  The L.M.S. turbine
driven 4-6-2 locomotive No. 6202. Rly Obsr, 1942, 14, 46-8.
illus., (line drawing: s. el.)Evans, M.Pacific steam : the British
Pacific locomotive. London, 1961.Flower, G.J. On the footplate of No. 46202. Rly Mag., 1949,
95, 394-6. illus. Livesay, E.H. On the Turbomotive's footplate. Loco. Rly Carr. Wagon
Rev., 1940, 46, 118-21. 3 illus.Both of the above were recorded by passive olservers. Livesay's article
formed part of a series which observed British locomotives at work through
North American eyes.
L.M. Pacifics: a pictorial, tribute. Hatch End (Middlesex), Roundhouse Books,
1967. 120 p. incl.. front. 136 illus., table. Powell, A.J. Stanier locomotive
classes. 1991. Pp: 75-9.Chapter entitled Class 7P-turbine-driven 4-6-2: This includes 46202
Princess Anne.Ransome-Wallis, P. Unconventional forms of motive power in:,
Ransome-Wallis, P.The concise
encyclopaedia of world railway locomotives. 1959.Pp. 461-77 (Chap. 9): Includes the "Turbomotive".
TAPERED roller bearings on the L.M.S.R. Turbomotive: absence of wear after
250,000 miles in service. Rly Gaz., 1944, 81, 282. 2 illus.
TAPER-ROLLER bearings of the L.M.S.R. turbine locomotive. Engineering,
1944, 158, 128; 130.4 illus.Waterhouse, E.S.. A footplate
ride on L.M.S.R. turbine engine No. 6202. . Rly. Mag., 1943,
89, 303-4. "no sharp beat of the exhaust, just a hum to break the silence as
we gilded out". Describes trip from Euston to Liverpool and a return on
streamliner 6243 City of Lancaster: thought return journey much
dirtier.

7P: later (8P) "Princess Coronation": 1937 :
There seems to be some confusion as to the correct nomenclature for
this class variously referred to as the "Princess Coronation ,
Coronation , Coronation Scot ,and City" class. If the
A4 class may be considered as the ultimate development of the steam locomotive
in terms of speed, then this class marks the British apex in terms of power
output. During tests with a 600-ton train a drawbar horsepower of 2,511 was
recorded, or a derived figure of 3,333 horsepower at the cylinders. Further,
for a brief period Coronation held the British speed record of 114
mile/h. The story of this high speed run is told with great gusto in R.A.
Riddles' paper retrospactive section) and rather more cautiously by C.J.
Allen on a number of occasions.
Some of the locomotives were built with streamlined casings. The aerodynamic
studies, which led up to the design used, have been described in .W. Peacock's
"Railway wind tunnel work" (retrospective section). The eamlined engines
were painted in a livery of royal blue, with silver horizontal stripes which
met at a point on the smokebox. Later this was changed to LMS red with gold
bands.
Some very extensive contemporary descriptions were published, but it should
be noted that a proportion of this material may refer to the special rolling
stock for the Coronation Scot train.
One locomotive was shipped to the United States for the New York World's
Fair. This is described by R.A. Riddles and by
F.C. Bishop. The former was in charge of the arrangements,
whilst the latter was the engine driver who accompanied the locomotive and
caught pneumonia.

May 1955: 46237 City of Bristol was sent to the Western Region for
comparative tests with the modernized King class. Nock's record is
of one dynamometer run on which he was permitted to travel.

A "DUCHESS" on the W.R.. Trains ill., 1955, 8, 223.A record of the event and nothing more.Nock, O.S. British locomotive practice and performance. Rly
Mag., 1959. 105, 335-41+. 4 tables.

7P (later 8P) "Princess Coronation" 1947: Ivatt: Ivatt modified this Stanier design by the addition of roller bearings,
rocking grates, an increase in superheating surface, self cleaning smokeboxes
and a new frame arrangement at the rear end. Two locomotives of this type
were built: one of which was named Sir William Stanier,
F.R.S..

Powell notes that Stanier had to produce a bigger boiler and then
adapt the 'Princess' chassis to carry it. Bigger grate, bigger firebox volume,
bigger free gas area, bigger barrel, bigger superheater  all these
were incorporated in that delightful boiler. It was pushed upward so that
the front corners of the Belpaire firebox were up to the limit of the loading
gauge, just enabling 6ft 9in wheels to be accommodated underneath it.
(Incidentally, what was it so magical about 6ft 9in diameter coupled wheels
for express passenger engines in this country?). The cylinder layout was
altered back to a conventional one, but retaining the divided drive, thus
enabling rocking levers to be fitted behind the cylinders and avoiding valve
setting troubles due to thermal expansion. It enabled the steam and exhaust
passages to be better steamlined internally, and the crew's access for
preparation between the frames to be made more congenial. The reference by
Langridge in a relatively obscure publication is especially important as
it outlines the way in which the class was designed.

Allen, C.J.British Pacific
locomotives.1962.Allen, C.J.The Stanier
Pacifics of the L.M.S.. 1950. The text of the later work by C.J. Allen where relating to the Stanier
Pacifics is a slightly up-dated version of the earlier work. The diagrams
in the earlier work are not repeated, however.Bishop, F.C. Queen Mary of the iron
road, as told to M.C.D.Wilson and A.S.L. Robinson. 1946.A "ghosted" autobiography of Driver Bishop, the driver who accompanied
the Coronation Scot to the New York World's Fair.Blakemore, Michael and Michael
Rutherford. Duchess of Hamilton: ultimate in Pacific power. Although superficially about one locomotive this work describes the
whole classBond, R.C. Organisation and control
of locomotive repairs on British Railways. J. Instn Loco. Engrs,1953, 43, 175. 216-65. (Paper No. 520).Includes figures for the mileage obtained between overhauls for the
class.Bond, R.C. Ten years' experience
with the L.M.S. 4-6-2 non-condensing turbine locomotive No.6202. J. Instn
Loco. Engrs, 1946, 36, 182-265. (Paper No. 458). Page 187 : the author quotes hammer blow figures for the Duchess
class.Bulleid, O.V.S. Railway rolling stock and tendencies in design.
Engineering, 1949, 167, 68-71; 94-5; 60. 13 illus., 4 diagrs.
(s. els.), 5 tables.Includes a comparison of the 1947 design with the Peppercorn A2, Gresley
Al and H.A. Ivan's Atlantics.Clay, J.F. The big red engines. J.Stephenson Loco. Soc., 1961,
37, 358-64. 4 illus. Cook, A.F.Raising steam on
the LMS: the evolution of LMS locomotive boilers. Huntingdon: RCTS,
1999. 233pp.The Duchess (Coronation) class boilers were superb producers of steam
and led to some of the highest power outputs attained in Britain. Cook also
notes the high number (three) of boiler explosions associated with the class
which can be attributed partly to the lack of training given to those expected
to handle such large locomotives and partly to detail: the water gauges were
greatly inferior to those used on the LNER. KPJ suspects that the class was
also prone to blow-backs, but has no statistical evidence.Doherty, DouglasThe LMS Duchesses.
Hemel Hempstead: Model and Allied Publications, 1973. 89pp + folding
diagram. Contents: Introduction by editor; The LMS Duchesses  their design
and construction by E.A. Langridge; The LMS Duchesses  a performance
evaluation by John Powell; The LMS Duchesses  a driver reminisces by
Peter Johnson; The LMS Duchesses  a critical appreciation by W.A. Tuplin.
General arrangement diagrams, numbers, names, etc, poorly printed
photographs.
The DUCHESSESvalete. Rly Obsr, 1964, 34, 340-4. table.Evans, M.Pacific steam : the British
Pacific locomotive. London, 1961.Fore, J. Footplate impressions.
J. Instn Loco. Engrs, 1955, 45, 317-21. (Paper No. 546).A graduate apprentice's impressions of the L.M.S. Pacifics gained
from footplate observations.Jenkinson, D. The "Coronation" Pacifics. Rly Wld, 1966,
27, 146-51; 188-92. 21 illus., 4 tables.The author limited his approach to externals, especially liveries.
Further he admits any uncertainties in his knowledge. A much fuller account
appeared in Modellers' Backtrack (still to be indexed). Johnson, Peter. The LMS Duchesses- a driver reminisces in
Doherty.Writer was driver at Crewe North and describes routine runs northwards
as far as Glasgow, some of which were of mediocre quality due to the condition
of the locomotives in the 1960s. He also describes a run from Shrewsbury
to Paddington on an enthusiast special.Langridge, E.A. The LMS Duchesses  their design and construction
in Doherty.This is a very important source
as Langridge was a part of the team of draughtsman
who worked under T.F. Coleman at Derby to produce the design. He gave the
names of other members of the team, and the reasons why certain procedures
were adopted, and the influences from other designs. Livesay, E.H. Scottish locomotive experiences. No.8 The "Coronation
Scot", L.M.S.R.  Glasgow to London. Engineer, 1939, 168, 467-9;
486-7.2 illus., diagr.Observations made from the footplate, partly comparative with North
American experience.L.M.Pacifics : a pictorial tribute. Hatch End (Middlesex), Roundhouse
Books, 1967. 120 p. incl. front. 136 illus., table.Peacock, D.W. Railway wind tunnel
work. J. Instn Loco. Engrs, 1951, 41, 606-61. (Paper No.506).
Development work on the streamlining is described, plus details of
smoke deflection work on the non.streamlined series.Powell, A.J. Living with London Midland
locomotives. 1977Chapter 9: A trio of high-born ladies: orginally published in Trains
ill., 1958, 11, 231-9.Powell, John. LMS Duchesses  a performance evaluation in
Doherty..Record of the official tests performed on the locomotives, and records
of locomotive performane as recorded as part of his work, and by others.
Also includes notes on and diagram indicating the way in which the design
could have been extended to give greater power and performance.Powell, A.J. "45671", pseud. London Midland main lines and
today's locomotive performance. 2. Euston Crewe. Trains ill.,
1961, 14, 291-7.Theoretical performance is compared with actual running.Powell, A.J. Stanier locomotive
classes. 1991. Pp: 80-7.Chapter entitled Class 7P-four-cylinder 4-6-2 'Coronation'/'Duchess':
This includes the many, mainly minor, alterations which took place during
the life of the locomotives: this is useful information for modellers. The
most obvious was the removal of streamlining from those locomotives which
were streamlined.Riddles, R.A. "Coronation Scot"  a railway development.
J. Rec. Trans. jr lnstn Engrs, 1947/48, 58, 98-104.This is an unusual paper in that it is a very personal account of
the author's experiencesduring the 114 mile/h test run and on the North American
trip. It is written in the same informal style as Cox's and Holcroft's books,
but this was published long before the author retired.Roe, F.G. I saw three Englands. Rly Mag., 1949, 95,
7-12; 81-4. 3 illus. (incl.port.), map.A retired Canadian engine driver's footplate experiences in
England.Tuplin, W.A. The LMS Duchesses  a critical appreciation in
Doherty.Tuplin appears to heve been usurped by Powell in suggesting improvements
to the design and in this case Tuplin adds little: it may be noted that he
appeared to be allergic to streamlining.Webber, A.F. The proportions of
locomotive boilers. J. Instn Loco. Engrs, 1937, 27, 688-726.
(Paper 378). An analysis on a comparative basis.

6P ("Royal Scot") :1927 : Fowler : During 1926 design work had reached an advanced stage for a 4-6-2
compound locomotive, but whilst this work was in progress the Motive Power
Department borrowed a Castle locomotive from the G.W.R. for trials
on the Euston to Carlisle route. The trials were successful. Work on the
Pacific design was halted and the C.M.E.'s Department was requested to supply
a locomotive, which could meet the Castle specification. Further notes
on the origin of the design are presented in the introduction to the
retrospective material.
The new 4-6-0 locomotive was massive in appearance, due to its large, parallel
boiler and squat chimney. Three 18 x 26 in cylinders, coupled with an evaporative
heating surface of 2081 ft2 and a boiler pressure of 250 lb/in2
produced a powerful locomotive suitable for hauling the heaviest express
trains of the period. The significance of the design was not ignored by the
technical press. Several extensive accounts appeared and many of these were
accompanied by detailed, sectionalized drawings.

1929: Glenboig-Euston non-stop: In connection with the opening of the Bussey Coal Distillation plant,
a non-stop train was run at high speed from Glenboig to London. The distance
covered was 395% miles and the locomotive was No. 6127
Novelty

A LONG non-stop run on the L.M.&S.Ry. Loco. RlyCarr.Wagon Rev.,
1929, 35, 269.

1932/33: In 1932 and 1933 special trains were chartered between London and
Coventry to take visitors to a motor-car factory. The L.M.S. took the opportunity
to demonstrate railway speed by using "Royal Scot" locomotives on light
trains.

1933: Exhibition at the Chicago World's Fair:
No.6100 Royal Scot was shipped to the United States for the
World's Fair. A bell and commemorative plaques were presented to the locomotive.
The bell was removed when the locomotive was rebuilt with a
taper-boiler.

6P (later 7P) Rebuilt Scot: 1943: Stanier:
In 1942 Stanier re-boilered two "Jubliee" class locomotives with enlarged
boilers. This boiler formed the basis for rebuilding the "Royal Scot" type.
Rebuilding continued under British Railways and the last unrebuilt Scot survived
until 196X.

Retrospective and critical Cox and Holcroft disagree on the origin of the Royal Scot design.
Holcroft has suggested that the type was merely a 3-cylinder version of
Maunsell's Lord Nelson class. This has been refuted by Cox who has
stated that the design was unique, except in that the fireboxes and cabs
of the two types were-similar. The basis for the controversy was due to the
LMS acquisition of a set of Lord Nelson drawings to help in the design
work. The monograph by Essery and Jenkinson is especially important. The
majority of the references consider both the rebuilt and unrebuilt forms,
although some as the derailment at Weaver Junction or the locomotive exchanges
refer only to one type.

Allen, C.J.The locomotive
exchanges, 1870-1948. [1950] . The rebuilt Royal Scot performed exceptionally well during the locomotive
exchangesAnderson, E.P.Report on the partial derailment of the engine of
an express passenger train that occurred on the 14th January at Weaver Junction,
between Acton Bridge and Preston Brook. Ministry of Transport Railway
accidents which occurred during the three months ending 31st March, 1930.
London, HMSO, 1930. 10 p. + folding plate. 4 diagrs. (incl. 1 s. el.)Anderson recommended that the guiding effect of the bogie fitted to
the "Royal Scot" class should be increased and that the flanges should be
deepened if possible.Baxter, F.L. Balancing of three-cylinder locomotives. Engineer,
1935, 160, 84-6. 5 diagrs., 8 tables.The Royal Scot class is considered on a comparative
basis.Clay, J.F. Their place in history. No. 1. The Royal Scots. J.
Stephenson Loco. Soc., 1966, 42, 5-15. 12 illus.A history.Cook, A.F.Raising steam on
the LMS: the evolution of LMS locomotive boilers. Huntingdon: RCTS,
1999. 233pp.The question of the boiler design and the possible influences of Swindon,
and of the Maunsell Lord Nelson class is discussed at considerable
lengthCox, E.S. and Johansen, F.C.
Locomotive frames. J. Instn Loco. Engrs, 1948, 38, 81-115.
Disc.:115-96 (Paper No.473).On p. 175 the authors, and on p. 168 J.C. Loach, remark on the
difficulties in maintaining the frames of this class.Cox, E.S.Locomotive panorama.
1965. See p.59 for the Cox v Holcroft controversy.Hunt, David with Bob Essery and
Fred James. The rebuilt 'Royal Scots'.LMS Locomotive Profiles
No.1.Highly detailed drawings from NRM collections. A very significant
source of information.Fowler, H.Discussion onFry, L.H. Some experimental
results from a three-cylinder compound locomotive. Proc. Instn mech.
Engrs, 1927, (2), 923-54. Disc.: 955-1024. Pp.955-61 : Fowler comments on Royal Scot performance. Holcroft, H. "Castles", "Lord Nelsons", and "Royal Scots". Rly
Mag., 1947, 93, 13-15; 27. 3 illus.Holcroft, H.Discussion onCox, E.S. A modern locomotive history: ten years' development on the
L.M.S.  1923-1932. J. Instn Loco. Engrs, 1946, 36, 100-41.
Disc.: 141-70; 275-6. (Paper No.457).Pp. 146-8 : Holcroft in the above references states his case for the
connection between the Lord Nelson and Royal Scot
classes.Jenkinson, D. The "Royal Scots". Part 1. Rly Wld, 1967,
28, 422-7. 12 illus., 2 tables. This historical review is mainly concerned with externals, such as
liveries and smoke deflector plates. Part 2 (Rly Wld, 1967, 28,
480-3) is mostly, but not entirely, restricted to the rebuilt
locomotives.Mais, S.P.B. Royal Scot and her forty nine sister
engines, London, L.M.S., [19 ]. [vi], 64, [2] p. + 11 plates (incl.
1 folding). 57 illus., 2 diagrs.Publicity material with some rather charming notes on the old locomotive
names bestowed upon the class.Mount, A.H.L. Report on the accident that occurred on the 22nd
March, 1931 to an express passenger train, which left the rails at Leighton
Buzzard. Ministry of Transport : Railway accidents.. . which occurred
during the three months ending 31st March, 1931. London, H.M.S.O., 1931.
15 p. + folding plate, diagr., 2 plans.The accident was partly caused by the driver's view being obscured
by drifting smoke. Mount suggested the addition of deflector
plates.Nock, O.S. Three generations of West Coast 4-6-0's : Claughtons 
Royal Scots  converted Scots. Rly pict., 1949, 2,76-81;
98-104.8 illus., 2 tables.Development rather than performance.Powell, A.J. Stanier locomotive
classes. 1991. Pp. 62-7.Class 6P-three-cylinder 4-6-0 rebuilt 'Royal Scot'. This is largely
restricted to the rebuilt locomotives and is a slimmer Chapter than some
of the others as the rebuilt design appears to have been correct from
the outset. Notes that large sand boxes were fitted between intermediate
and trailing driving wheels in endeavour to alleviate severe slipping at
high speed (this soes not seem to have been noted in the contemporary literature.
Smaoke deflectors fitted from 1947.Tuplin, W.A. Sir Henry Fowler's "Royal Scots": a survey to mark the
conversion of the last unrebuilt "Scot", No.46137. Trains ill., 1955,
8, 244-9. 5 illus., 3 tables.A critical survey.

No.6170 Fury: 1930: Fowler: experimental
high-pressure compound locomotive. This locomotive was equipped with a Schmidt-Henschel boiler with a
maximum boiler pressure of 900 lb/in2. Little was written about
the locomotive at the time: the contemporary material was spartan in comparison
with the literature on the Gresley/Yarrow (W1) project. The locomotive never
ran in service and even E.S. Cox (pp.90-1v.1) in his Locomotive
panorama adds little to this optimistic but ill-starred
experiment.

6P (later 7P) British Legion (No. 6170) :1935
: The basis for this design was the chassis from the high pressure
locomotive Fury The Schmidt experimental boiler
was replaced by a new Stanier tapered design, which eventually formed the
basis for the type used to rebuild the entire "Royal Scot" class.

5XP ("Patriot") : 1930: Fowler : This class was variously known as the converted Claughton,
Baby Scot and Patriot classesthe last being the official
name from about 1937: see L.M.S.R. "Baby Scots" to be known as "Patriot"
class in Railway Gazette, 1936, 65, 634. The design originated
as a combination of the Derby designed large Claughton boiler and
the Royal Scot chassis. The first two locomotives incorporated LNWR
wheel centres and bogies from the Claughton class. The next 40 locomotives
did not even possess these LNWR parts (but see
Powell Stanier locomotive classes
where it is stated that the Jubilee class built at Crewe were fitted
with Claughton bogies), but were known as rebuilds. It "Claughtons"
 they were, more correctly, replacements. The contemporary literature
is remarkable for its paucity. The Stanier/Fairbairn/Ivatt rebuilds are
considered with the rebuilt Jubilee
class..

Powell noted that the 'Patriot' design evolved... from a marriage
of the 'Royal Scot' chassis and the enlarged 'Claughton' boiler. The first
two engines were perhaps classifiable as a rebuild of the 'Claughtons', since
various components such as bogie, wheels, brake gear and reversing gear were
used again. The next ten engines had new coupled wheels but were otherwise
generally similar, while the remainder were almost entirely new engines with
various detail differences.

Now in principle, there was nothing wrong with such a design. The
'Royal Scot' cylinders and motion, while not quite up to the most enlightened
modern standards, proved satisfactory over many years of hard-driven service,
and superficially the boiler and firebox were of good size for the job. Yet
somehow they just did not click together as they should have done, and the
result was an engine that you had to handle understandingly and humour along:
hammer it you could not. There were two reasons for this. Firstly the boiler
tube proportions were wrong, and secondly the draughting was deficient.

In addition, there were a multitude of minor things to go wrong. The
smokebox, in keeping with that of other outside-cylinder engines of Fowler
origin, was rather prone to draw air at the base, particularly at high mileages
when things began to 'work'. The injectors, fed from that Midland-type tender,
could be very temperamental and even the vacuum pipe layout could be troublesome:
there was a bit of a tangle of it adjacent to the reversing screw that leaked
and fractured as soon as the engine got run down and the boiler waltzed about
in the frames. So, as you can imagine, you were never remotely sure, until
you were on your way, what sort of prize you had got hold of. KPJ knew that
if Giggeswick or another of those quaintly named locomotives with
asthmatic whistles turned up on the 4.47 from Manchester Exchange to Hull
(as far as Greenfield) he would have to wait up to an extra ten minutes for
his evening meal. It would be a struggle all of the way

4P ("Prince of Wales") :1923 Hughes/Beames : As a result of the Betley
Road accident, which involved fatigue in the Joy valve gear, some of the
class were rebuilt with a modified form of Walschaerts valve gear. This gear
functioned outside the frames, but operated the inside cylinders through
levers. From 1925 many of the class were re-boilered with Belpeire boilers.

4-6-0

5XP (later 6P) "Jubilee": 1934: To some extent the class may be regarded as a taper-boiler development
of the Fowler "Patriot" class in that it was designed to fulfil the same
duties and had broadly similar dimensions. The original boilers had a very
low degree of superheat and followed GWR design in its entirety. Subsequently
this had to be corrected with a higher degree of superheat to suit the type
of fuels used on the LMS.

Powell's Stanier locomotive classes
groups these two classes or sub-classes together which makes sense
as the Jubilee class grew from the Patriot class and once rebuilt
with the larger 2A boiler, subsequently fitted to the rebuilt Scots, these
two types were identical. Powell questions why further locomotives were not
re-boilered, especially as the LMR was so obviously short of boiler power
[with KPJ wasteful double heading and late running]

6P (later 7P) "Jubilee" (Nos. 5735 and 5736) :1942 : These two locomotives were rebuilt from Stanier's own 1934 design.
New, larger boilers were fitted. No further locomotives of this class were
modified, presumably because of the cost involved, but some of the "Patriot"
type were later rebuilt to the same specifica tion. The boiler used was later
employed for the reconstructed "Royal Scots". If there was an RCTS "Locomotives
of the LMS" we might have been informed why the two locomotives reboilered
came from the final batch constructed at Crewe and not from from one of the
earlier series.

5:1934 : This class consisted of over 800 straight forward mixed traffic
locomotives which performed almost every type of service on almost any part
of the L.M.S. system. With the exception of the boiler variations more worthy
of a Craven than a Stanier and development found in other classes, the design
remained unchanged until lvatt produced several experimental versions in
1947/48. Powell (Stanier locomotive
classes) lists no less than 33 changes introduced during production,
and 15 modifications to this "standard" class and this excludes the
Ivatt-modifications noted earlier.

1947-: Ivatt : Experimental locomotives:Double chimneys, roller bearings, Caprotti valve gear, external Stephenson
link motion, and combinations of some of these, were fitted to a batch of
class 5 4-6-0s. This anarchic sub-class vied with the Bulleid Q1 class for
ugliness and downright eccentricity (such as the use of substantial splashers
coupled with American-style cabs).

Powell, A.J. Stanier locomotive
classes. 1991. Pp. 42-5Unfortunately, either the publisher or the author failed to provide
Chapter numbers, but Class 5 - 4-6-0 Caprotti valve gear is treated separately
and follows the main section on the class. There were many minor modifications
to this sub-class, including the fitting and removal of double
chimneys.

2-6-0

Powell, A.J. Stanier locomotive
classes. 1991. Pp. 26-9. Class 5-2-6-0. The Hughes parallel boiler 2-6-0s (nicknamed
'Crabs') proved to be a highly competent and economical design, and building
continued from 1926 to 1932, by which time a fleet of 245 was in service.
When 40 more locomotives in this category were authorised in the 1933 Building
Programme, Stanier decided to change the design to incorporate his own ideas
of higher boiler pressure, modest superheat, a tapered boiler and smaller
cylinders which would not need to be so steeply inclined. Much of the design
work was done in the Horwich drawing office, and various details betrayed
this origin. The 40 locomotives were built in the short period of five months,
but were never added to, their role being taken over within months by the
new Class 5

The boiler was of a similar diameter to those subsequently used on
the 'Jubilees' and Class 5, but shorter. The barrel was in two rings, the
front one cylindrical and the second tapered, and the boiler clothing reflected
this shape. There was neither a dome nor the usual safety valves on the firebox
top; instead, the safety valves were combined with the top-feed in a fitting
on the boiler barrel, beneath a casing very similar to that on GWR classes.
The circular smokebox rested on a cast saddle of much heavier appearance
than Stanier's later fabricated saddles. Because the higher boiler pressure
allowed smaller cylinders to be used, these could be horizontal while stay
ing within the loading gauge. They had extended valve chests and the clothing
was almost square at the top. A crosshead-driven vacuum pump was mounted
below the bottom slidebar on the left-hand side. The wide gap between the
cylinder top and the plat form accommodated a snifting valve.

A Horwich-style double side-window was fitted, and the class perpetuated
the Horwich practice of the front platform being narrower than that over
cylinders and motioxi, a feature which continued on the Class 5 4-6-0s and
Class 8F 2-8-0s. Only a single vacuum ejector was provided, the body of which
was much smaller than the two-ejector type; it was just in front of the cab
on the left side with long exhaust pipe to the smokebox.

A standard Fowler 3,500 gal tender, much narrower than the cab, was
attached. It had coal rails, but surprisingly no water scoop. The class appeared
at a time when snap-head rivets were displacing flush counter sunk ones,
and both cab and tender exhibited a positive rash of rivet heads.

Out-of-character features for the Stanier marque were the very shallow
platform valance angles (a long standing Horwich practice), the fitting of
steam sanding at a time when Stanier had 'imported' dry trickle sanding from
Swindon, and the use of a Midland whistle rather than the Caledonian-type
hooter. No. 13245 was fitted with a GWR style of safety valve bonnet but
this was removed in favour of something which looked like a cross between
a GWR bonnet and a dome: this was fitted to ten locomotive. Very angular
cylinder casings were fitted to the initial locomotives.

This class was the final British express tank engine design. In all
the LMS inherited three classes of this type and Hughes added the fourth.
The design was based on the rebuilt L&YR 4-6-0s and incorporated four
cylinders. It was a most impressive looking locomotive, but performance,
especially fuel consumption, was poor.

Whitelegg, RM. Glasgow and South Western Railway notes. J. Stephenson
Loco. Soc., 1951, 27, 267-71; 257-8; 283. 5 illus.Whitelegg justified his use of the 4-6-4T on the L.T. & S.R .
and asserted that the Hughes design was based upon his G.& S.W.R.
design.

4: 1927 : Fowler : In view of the Sevenoaks accident involving the Maunsell K, or "River",
class 2-6-4Ts, 1927 would seem to have been an inauspicious time the introduction
of a new 2-6-4T. Rowledge Maunsell Moguls
notes that Fowler checked with the Inspecting Officer for the accident
before permitting construction of the LMS design to go ahead. In actuality
the class was very successful in service, mainly due to the use of long-lap
valves, and was the one of the few Fowler designs used by Stanier as a direct
basis for his own developments. Stanier only changed the boiler type when
introducing his standard 2-cylinder tank engine.

Powell, A.J. Stanier locomotive
classes. 1991.In 1927 Fowler introduced some highly successful parallel boilered
2-6-4T locomotives to handle heavy suburban passenger trains. With an excellent
boiler and long-travel Walschaerts valve gear they proved to be very speedy
and were more than once timed at 90mph, despite coupled wheels of only 5ft
6in diameter. Clearly this was a design which Stanier could endorse, but
which could not be redesigned immediately to incorporate his own ideas. The
last 30 locomotives to be built (Nos 2395-2424) in the 1933 Building Programme
were therefore modified from the original design as a halfway stage before
the taper boiler version could be produced. The more visible changes were
the provision of double side-window cabs, wheels with tri angular rims and
built-up balance weights, and side bolster bogies and bissel trucks. These
locomotives did splendid work on suburban services in the St Pancras, Stoke,
Manchester and Glasgow areas, over the Central Wales line and on banking
duties from Oxenholme and Tebay on the West Coast main line.

Stanier modificationsStanier was responsible for three versions of this design, which
originated in 1927 under Fowler. The first Stanier version was introduced
in 1933 and was the Fowler design, modified with a side-window cab and doors.
This type was also the subject of experiments in welding. In 1934 a
three-cylinder taper-bailer class was built for the Southend line, which
was followed in 1935 by a taper-boiler variant of the two-cylinder Fowler
locomotives.

1934: No.2424(a parallel-bailer locomotive with modified cab) incorporated a number
of welded parts, notably the cylinders and pony truck. The Stanier paper
is a general review of British activity, but it, naturally reflects this
particular experiment.

Rogers (Transition from
steam) records R.G. Jarvis's comments on the rebuilt
Bulleid Pacifics and observed: 'I suppose that locomotives with three cylinders,
all driving on the second pair of coupled wheels, and having three independent
sets of Walschaerts valve gear are rare, but Stanier's 3-cylinder 2-6-4 tank
for the Tilbury section is a precedent'.

Powell notes that the 2-cylinder 2-6-4T was barred from Fenchurch
Street, but that a 3-cylinder design wiith improved balancing and reduced
hammer-blow would be acceptable to the LNER's Civil Engineer (although Powell
failed to recognize the significance of this aspect). It was also considered
that the 3-cylinder design would give improved acceleration and Powell considered
that the design "proved ideally suited to the difficult conditions on the
Tilbury section".

As noted in 1927 Fowler had introduced some highly successful parallel
boilered 2-6-4T locomotives to handle heavy suburban passenger trains. Clearly
this was a design which Stanier could endorse, but which could not be redesigned
immediately to incorporate his own ideas. The last 30 locomotives to be built
(Nos 2395-2424) in the 1933 Building Programme were therefore modified from
the original design as a halfway stage before the taper boiler version could
be produced. The more visible changes were the provision of double side-window
cabs, wheels with tri angular rims and built-up balance weights, and side
bolster bogies and bissel trucks.

The building of Stanier's taper boiler version began at the end of
1935, and over the next seven years a total of 206 was built, 133 at Derby
and 73 by the North British Locomotive Co (Hyde Park works, Springburn).
It was originally intended that the first batch of eight, Nos 2537-2544,
should be of the three-cylinder type but this was changed after
ordering.

The general layout and wheelbase were similar to that of the parallel
boiler version, but slightly larger cylinders with extended valve chests
and outside steam pipes were provided. The valve spindle crosshead guides
were fitted to the rear valve chest covers instead of on separate frame brackets.
Improvements were made to axleboxes and spring gear.

The taper boiler (Class 4) with top-feed (under the usual small dome-like
casing with side bulges) was identical with that of the three-cylinder 2-6-4Ts,
save only for an increase in the size of the superheater to 18 elements,
and the provision of wash out inspection doors on the top shoulders of the
Belpaire firebox, under small domed covers. The smokebox rested on a
saddle.

The side tanks and bunker were of riveted construction, the narrow
bunker top being tapered inwards at the back end to give the driver better
visibility when running bunker first: this resulted in a prominent diagonal
fold line in the bunker side plating. The side tanks featured a small access
cutout over the expansion links, to reach which a footstep was fitted to
the bottom of the motion plate with a grab handle on the footplate valance
angle. The double side-window cab had waist-height doors and was cut away
behind the doorway. A similar bi-directional water scoop to that on the Fowler
locomotives was fitted below the cab, revealed by the domes in the back of
the cab and the additional operating handle behind the driver. Dry trickle
sanding equipment was provided. The class proved very efficient and economical,
though when used on unbraked freight trains great care was needed on steep
falling gradients because of their limited brake power.

By 1943 some 243 2-6-4T locomotives of Stanier design, with either
two or three cylinders were in service, having the same 38ft 6in wheelbase
as their Fowler predecessors and thus limited to 6 chain minimum radius curves.
The accession of C. E. Fairburn as acting CME in 1943 led to a reappraisal
of the two-cylinder design, discarding the traditional 8ft 0in + 8ft 6in
coupled wheelbase to give greater flexibility; they could then negotiate
5 chain curves. A bonus was a weight reduction of 2.6 ton.

So successful did this revised design prove that following trials
it was also adopted for use on Southern Region services, Brighton works building
41 out of a total of 277. They formed the basis of the BR Standard 2-6-4T
(80XXX series), though the latter were less highly regarded by
enginemen.

The principal dimensions apart from length and weight &mdash;
were unchanged from the Stanier long-wheelbase 2-6-4Ts. There was a considerable
number of visual changes, however.(i) The front platforms were of light folded
construction, open in front of the cylinders for easier access to the piston
valves; (ii) The side tanks and bunker were of a new design, part welded
and part riveted, not supported by a platform valance angle. The internal
baffle plates were riveted but the tank bottom was welded as far as the trailing
coupled axle, behind which it was riveted. The bunker top had vertical sides
and there was (iii) Footsteps at the front and under the cab were of open
type; (iv) The coupling rods were fluted (v) Double brake blocks articulated
on to each hanger were provided to give longer block life (vi) External sieve
boxes were fitted under each tank balancing pipe behind the cab footsteps
(vii) Self-cleaning smokeboxes were fitted. This was not immediately accompanied
by the fitting of 'SC' plates below the shed plate (viii) The atomiser steam
cock was moved to the high position on the smokebox as on Nos 2537-2544,
and a cover was provided. Commencing with No 2229 (Derby, 5/46) all new examples
were fitted with rocking grates and hopper ashpans to make shed disposal
easier. The oper ating gear for the ashpan hopper doors projected from the
left side

Class 3:1935: This design was a taper-boiler development of the Fowler 1930 design.
Whilst most of the worst features of the Fowler type were eradicated, the
design could not be regarded as the most successful of 2-6-2Ts. In 1941 some
locomotives were rebuilt with larger boilers to try to increase the usefulness
of the class.

Powell, A.J. Stanier locomotive
classes. 1991."They were still poor locomotives" [like the Fowler locomotives]
and the wheelbase "could with advantage have been reduced by 18in or more".
"There was a very small superheater of only seven elements which did nothing
to improve the steaming." "...the side tanks were on the shallow side and
their limited capacity sometimes restricted their working range". They "were
undoubtedly Stanier's least successful design."

0-6-0T

2F :1928: Fowler: This class was built for dock working and had a short wheel base
and outside cylinders.

0-4-4T (1931) 2P class of 10
Small class of Fowler/Lemon "design" which introduced to the LMS certain
features that were to be used in future LMS Stanier designs, notably built-up
balance weights, spring balanced reversing shaft and side bolster bogies.
They had stove pipe chimneys, later replaced, and second-hand boilers.

Cox Locomotive panormama Vol.
1 stated that "Anderson, abetted by Harold Rudguard, an up and coming
key motive power influence on the Midland division, demanded a replica of
the Johnson design, the bulk of which had been built during the previous
century. Once again, if a 0-4-4T was really the only solution, there was
a more modern version already designed and in being on the North Stafford.
Since only 10 were required what more simple than to build up the Stoke drawings?
But no, the Midland mystique must have its fling  a final one as it
turned out  and the drawing office was solemnly set to dressing up
this ancient design with different smokebox, cab, tanks and trailing bogie,
all of which contributed nothing at all to performance. However, there was
one shattering break with past tradition, the engine was turned out with
a stovepipe chimney!